Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 54

Thread: Petraeus testifies CIA's Libya talking points were changed, lawmaker says

  1. #21
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Petraeus testifies CIA's Libya talking points were changed, lawmaker says

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    A couple of things...

    First, I believe messages regarding intel...such as from the CIA...are vetted through the Director National Intelligence first before going to the President.

    Second, the article is somewhat ambiguous in reality by this statement:



    In reality, in terms of government speak and the general flow of the bureaucracy, there's legitimately two ways to read that and think of the situation.

    A) The CIA drafts Administration "talking points" and distributes them Itself

    or

    B) The CIA drafts it's talking points which is submitted to the POTUS, whose staff disseminates it out to the officials of the administration

    Either could be possible, and the line in the story in no way is a definitive claim that it was the CIA that took out the information between their original penning of the intel and the point in which it was circulated.
    I disagree. There's only one logical way to read the statement and that is that the line about AQ was taken out before the final version was circulated to the administration. You can speculate that the statement could be wrong, or inartfully worded, but you can't read it to say that the administration removed the language.
    "The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. ... It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."

    -- Adam Smith

  2. #22
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Last Seen
    10-20-13 @ 04:50 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    3,195

    Re: Petraeus testifies CIA's Libya talking points were changed, lawmaker says

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    I disagree. There's only one logical way to read the statement and that is that the line about AQ was taken out before the final version was circulated to the administration. You can speculate that the statement could be wrong, or inartfully worded, but you can't read it to say that the administration removed the language.
    So the CIA tricked Obama into telling Rice to go on all those morning shows and blame it on a video?

  3. #23
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,998

    Re: Petraeus testifies CIA's Libya talking points were changed, lawmaker says

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    I disagree. There's only one logical way to read the statement and that is that the line about AQ was taken out before the final version was circulated to the administration. You can speculate that the statement could be wrong, or inartfully worded, but you can't read it to say that the administration removed the language.
    To "administration personnel" not to "The Administratoin". While you may not like it Adam, that is a legitimate difference. "Administration personnel" at times refers not specifically to the POTUS himself but the staff underneath him. I'ts not about being "wrong" or "inartfully word", it's about having a generalized understanding of how things are referenced within the government beuracracy.

    It absolutely could be that Patreaus was suggesting that in the morning the CIA had it as part of their report but it was taken out prior to their submission of it to the administratoin.

    It also could absolutely be that Patreaus was suggesting that the CIA had it in their report they submitted, but at the point when the official report went out to the administrations officials it was no longer there.

    Simply because you dislike that option doesn't make it not plausible nor legitimate. Just because you wish to reword it yourself into "The Administration" rather than "Administration Officials" doesn't make it the truth. And the reality is, it's a one line summary of a testimony that is stated in a way that leaves WHO made the change 100% unanswered and ambiguous. There is not only "one way" one can "logically" read the line about info being taken out because it does not in any way clearly indicate who took that information out. You are GUESSING based on the information present, same as everyone else...unlike some of us though, you're foolishly suggesting that the interpritation favorable to your desires is the only "real" way it could possibly mean.

  4. #24
    Sage
    Fisher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    12-06-13 @ 02:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    17,002

    Re: Petraeus testifies CIA's Libya talking points were changed, lawmaker says

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiggen View Post
    Agreed. The last word presented to the Administration should have been signed off on by Petraeus.
    It is not that unusual based on my understanding that lots of eyes see these sorts of things before they ever hit the Oval Office with people having the privilege to nuance them, but I don't feel like going ten rounds again with those folks who think the National Security Adviser personally sits down and goes through every agency's entire intelligence information every day at 3:00a.m. and personally writes the 6:00a.m. PDB 365 days a year. Crap gets staffed out. It is how the real world works.

  5. #25
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Denio Junction
    Last Seen
    11-13-14 @ 12:09 AM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    7,039
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Petraeus testifies CIA's Libya talking points were changed, lawmaker says

    There is one simple conclusion to all of this. No one really cares. Fact is obama himself could have issued a " stand down " order and covered it up after SHTF. People will. Be mad, but nothing can be done. Ultimately " mission accomplished " delay the facts past the election.

  6. #26
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 10:49 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,323

    Re: Petraeus testifies CIA's Libya talking points were changed, lawmaker says

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    So now you're attacking the credibility of the article that YOU posted?
    I see you are worried.
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  7. #27
    Sometimes wrong

    ttwtt78640's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Uhland, Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:49 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    34,691

    Re: Petraeus testifies CIA's Libya talking points were changed, lawmaker says

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    To "administration personnel" not to "The Administratoin". While you may not like it Adam, that is a legitimate difference. "Administration personnel" at times refers not specifically to the POTUS himself but the staff underneath him. I'ts not about being "wrong" or "inartfully word", it's about having a generalized understanding of how things are referenced within the government beuracracy.

    It absolutely could be that Patreaus was suggesting that in the morning the CIA had it as part of their report but it was taken out prior to their submission of it to the administratoin.

    It also could absolutely be that Patreaus was suggesting that the CIA had it in their report they submitted, but at the point when the official report went out to the administrations officials it was no longer there.

    Simply because you dislike that option doesn't make it not plausible nor legitimate. Just because you wish to reword it yourself into "The Administration" rather than "Administration Officials" doesn't make it the truth. And the reality is, it's a one line summary of a testimony that is stated in a way that leaves WHO made the change 100% unanswered and ambiguous. There is not only "one way" one can "logically" read the line about info being taken out because it does not in any way clearly indicate who took that information out. You are GUESSING based on the information present, same as everyone else...unlike some of us though, you're foolishly suggesting that the interpritation favorable to your desires is the only "real" way it could possibly mean.
    The real shame, in this whole discussion, is that the problem is not specifically who made a successful attack, but that ANY attack was possible, and very likely to succeed, with the super lax security in a super dangerous place. Who denied the request to upgrade security (and WHY), who authorized the prior downgrade of security (and WHY), who "ignored" the Obama order (during the lenghty attack) to help those under siege (and WHY)? These are, IMHO, the important things to be determined, not so much which specific band of thugs did the deed. These attacks are far from "odd" or "unusual" in that part of the lawless world. If the U.S. gov't insists on placing its personnel in harms way, the very least that they are owed is reasonable security (with backup). Obama seems to feel that "eventually" bringing "those responsible" to "justice" makes it all just fine and dandy, better not to "show disrespect" for those in Libya that are not really in control, than to assign security that makes our doubt of their capability obvious. USA, USA, USA...
    “The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists to adapt the world to himself.
    Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.” ― George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman

  8. #28
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Petraeus testifies CIA's Libya talking points were changed, lawmaker says

    Quote Originally Posted by American View Post
    I see you are worried.
    Worried about you.
    "The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. ... It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."

    -- Adam Smith

  9. #29
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Petraeus testifies CIA's Libya talking points were changed, lawmaker says

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    To "administration personnel" not to "The Administratoin".
    That's a rather absurd distinction to make, as there's obviously no way to transfer something an amorphous "administration" without actually transferring it to "administration personnel". You're bending over backwards to find ambiguity where none exists.
    "The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. ... It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."

    -- Adam Smith

  10. #30
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 10:49 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,323

    Re: Petraeus testifies CIA's Libya talking points were changed, lawmaker says

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    Worried about you.
    Ahh yes, a person attack. That'll prove Obama isn't a clown.
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •